$(RSA)^2$: A Rhetorical-Strategy-Aware Rational Speech Act Framework for Figurative Language Understanding

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2506.09301v1
• Date: Tue, 10 Jun 2025 23:35:57 GMT
• Title: $(RSA)^2$: A Rhetorical-Strategy-Aware Rational Speech Act Framework for Figurative Language Understanding
• Authors: Cesare Spinoso-Di Piano, David Austin, Pablo Piantanida, Jackie Chi Kit Cheung,
• Abstract summary: Figurative language (e.g., irony, hyperbole, understatement) is ubiquitous in human communication.<n>We introduce the Rhetorical-Strategy-Aware RSA $(RSA)2$ framework which models figurative language use by considering a speaker's employed rhetorical strategy.<n>We show that $(RSA)2$ enables human-compatible interpretations of non-literal utterances without modeling a speaker's motivations for being non-literal.
• Score: 39.662221712090506
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: Figurative language (e.g., irony, hyperbole, understatement) is ubiquitous in human communication, resulting in utterances where the literal and the intended meanings do not match. The Rational Speech Act (RSA) framework, which explicitly models speaker intentions, is the most widespread theory of probabilistic pragmatics, but existing implementations are either unable to account for figurative expressions or require modeling the implicit motivations for using figurative language (e.g., to express joy or annoyance) in a setting-specific way. In this paper, we introduce the Rhetorical-Strategy-Aware RSA $(RSA)^2$ framework which models figurative language use by considering a speaker's employed rhetorical strategy. We show that $(RSA)^2$ enables human-compatible interpretations of non-literal utterances without modeling a speaker's motivations for being non-literal. Combined with LLMs, it achieves state-of-the-art performance on the ironic split of PragMega+, a new irony interpretation dataset introduced in this study.

Related papers

• Are LLMs good pragmatic speakers? [3.4113474745671923]
  Large language models (LLMs) are trained on data assumed to include natural language pragmatics, but do they actually behave like pragmatic speakers? We attempt to answer this question using the Rational Speech Act (RSA) framework, which models pragmatic reasoning in human communication. We find that while scores from the LLM have some positive correlation with those from RSA, there isn't sufficient evidence to claim that it behaves like a pragmatic speaker.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-11-03T13:23:18Z)
• DiPlomat: A Dialogue Dataset for Situated Pragmatic Reasoning [89.92601337474954]
  Pragmatic reasoning plays a pivotal role in deciphering implicit meanings that frequently arise in real-life conversations. We introduce a novel challenge, DiPlomat, aiming at benchmarking machines' capabilities on pragmatic reasoning and situated conversational understanding.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-06-15T10:41:23Z)
• Are Representations Built from the Ground Up? An Empirical Examination of Local Composition in Language Models [91.3755431537592]
  Representing compositional and non-compositional phrases is critical for language understanding. We first formulate a problem of predicting the LM-internal representations of longer phrases given those of their constituents. While we would expect the predictive accuracy to correlate with human judgments of semantic compositionality, we find this is largely not the case.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-10-07T14:21:30Z)
• What Drives the Use of Metaphorical Language? Negative Insights from Abstractness, Affect, Discourse Coherence and Contextualized Word Representations [13.622570558506265]
  Given a specific discourse, which discourse properties trigger the use of metaphorical language, rather than using literal alternatives? Many NLP approaches to metaphorical language rely on cognitive and (psycho-)linguistic insights and have successfully defined models of discourse coherence, abstractness and affect. In this work, we build five simple models relying on established cognitive and linguistic properties to predict the use of a metaphorical vs. synonymous literal expression in context.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-05-23T08:08:53Z)
• Testing the Ability of Language Models to Interpret Figurative Language [69.59943454934799]
  Figurative and metaphorical language are commonplace in discourse. It remains an open question to what extent modern language models can interpret nonliteral phrases. We introduce Fig-QA, a Winograd-style nonliteral language understanding task.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-04-26T23:42:22Z)
• It's not Rocket Science : Interpreting Figurative Language in Narratives [48.84507467131819]
  We study the interpretation of two non-compositional figurative languages (idioms and similes) Our experiments show that models based solely on pre-trained language models perform substantially worse than humans on these tasks. We additionally propose knowledge-enhanced models, adopting human strategies for interpreting figurative language.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-08-31T21:46:35Z)
• Provable Limitations of Acquiring Meaning from Ungrounded Form: What will Future Language Models Understand? [87.20342701232869]
  We investigate the abilities of ungrounded systems to acquire meaning. We study whether assertions enable a system to emulate representations preserving semantic relations like equivalence. We find that assertions enable semantic emulation if all expressions in the language are referentially transparent. However, if the language uses non-transparent patterns like variable binding, we show that emulation can become an uncomputable problem.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-04-22T01:00:17Z)
• Learning to refer informatively by amortizing pragmatic reasoning [35.71540493379324]
  We explore the idea that speakers might learn to amortize the cost of Rational Speech Acts over time. We find that our amortized model is able to quickly generate language that is effective and concise across a range of contexts.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-05-31T02:52:22Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.